Is this the last of the Yankees?

[rokketmn]

Let's get back to talking about a team with a future...The Mets!

The Mets have that young core, and have about $40mm coming off their payroll next season. That will drop them into the $40-50mm payroll range. There just isn't enough quality to spend on.

These are the best options out there with their current age:

Carcher: they don't need one with D'Arnaud

1st base: Corey hart-32; Mike Napoli-32; Paul Konerko-38; Adam Lind - 30; Kendry Morales- 30; Justin Morneau-33; Mike Morse-32; Mark Reynolds-30.

2nd base: Cano- 31; Zobrist has a $7mm club option which Tampa will definitely pick up

3rd base: they have Wright

shortstop: Yuniesky Betancourt- 32; Alexi Casilla-29; Yunel Escobar-31 - Rays have a $5mm option, but they probably let him walk; Derek Jeter- 40 - as if he's really leaving the Yankees; Jhonny Peralta- 32 -and PED's

Outfield:Jason Kubel- 32 - D-Bax hold $7.5mm option; Nate McLouth-32; Mike Morse; David Murphy-32; Delmon Young-28; Coco Crisp-34 -A's hold $7.5mm club option; Jacoby Ellsbury-30; Curtis Granderson-33; Franklin Gutierrez-31; Chris Young-30 - A's hold $11mm option which I doubt they exercise; Carlos Beltran-37; Shin-Soo Choo-31; Nelson Cruz-33 - and PED's; Jeff Francouer-30; Corey Hart; Hunter Pence-31;

Not exactly a glowing list to choose from. The 2015 list is not any better.

The Mets could even do well to sign McLouth to a 2 year deal and hope that Brandon Nimmo is ready by 2015 or 2016. Or other stop gaps like David Murphy, Chris Young, or Jason Kubel.

Given the list... aside from Ellsbury, I would go for Morse and/or Morales, but only on deals 3 years or less. Likely 2 for Morse.

If I were Alderson, I wouldn't go crazy. The Mets best options for adding a long term power bat is likely to be through a trade.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

Yes, they have. Most years, the Yankees are better than Detroit, but this particular series happens to be in NY, and the Tigers are catching Nova, Hughes, and Pettite. Needless to say, those are not nice people at all, plus Detroit isn't using Scherzer. So, no.. that's no series to take for granted. Not saying for sure the Yankees win this one, but I wouldn't be shocked to pieces if they were to.

Have you seen Hughes and Pettitte?

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

Whatever, you're so stoneheaded at times, I'm not even going to argue this with you, but as businessmen, don't you think the Steineys see the fiscal prudence in attracting the big names by outbidding everyone in order to pack Yankee Stadium to the rafters?? I know alot more about the Yankees than you think I do.. they're only a playoff opponent of ours like almost every season it seems like.

Of course they do, but then they also look at the contracts to A-Rod, CC, Teixeira, etc. that are hanging like a noose around their necks, and they have 2nd thoughts. I'm just saying they're going to be cautious, and that can be wise, but it can also become a detriment.

 

[nynasty]

It felt pretty good. You may feel otherwise, but I am of the belief that if my team is not good enough to win it all, I would rather get a better draft pick.

I would rather that than be utterly emabarrassed on the national spotlight like the Yankees were last season.

The Sox record last season doesn't bother me. You either win the World Series or you don't. I don't dwell on the past. I live in the now and look to the future.

Sox future > Yankees future. Book it!

LOL

This guy kills me. Glad to see you and your idiocy found this board. You're nothing if not entertaining.

You'd rather lose 90+ and finish in last place than lose in the ALCS. You either win the World Series or you don't. If you don't, it's better to have good draft position. Unless you're the Yankees!

Look at how you contradict yourself in this very thread.

Yankees .500 record = doom, extinction. Sox well below .500 record last year = great draft position, set up for the future! The most hysterical part is you're completely oblivious to how silly your arguments are.


You used to be a Met fan, now you're a Sox fan? What the hell is that?

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

You're saying they are not going to be ready next season, and I agree with you, but you want them to spend a lot of money. That doesn't make sense. You wait until you are contending, or at least close to contending before you start adding high salaries and years to player contracts. Don't forget, in order for the Mets to keep their core, they are going to have to sign the Harveys, Wheelers, etc to long term deals to keep them from free agency. They have time on many of those guys, but they could still look to lock them up before their arbitration years kick in.

I think Ellsbury is a good idea because he serves multiple purposes. He is a leadoff hitter, and good defender in the OF. Plus, he has great speed. I am of the opinion that you don't pay for speed, as I was against the Crawford signing in Boston, but Ellsbury makes sense for the Mets.

As for Choo...he is already 31 years old and making about $8mm. Whay will he want in free agency, since this will likely be his last contract? He tops out at 20 SB's a season and this year he has 12 and has been caught 8 times. Not a great percentage. He is miscast in CF in Cinci, but he has looked brutal there. A move back to RF could help, but his defense (or speed) will not get better as he gets older.

A guy like Morse makes perfect sense. Injuries have been his problem. The guy hits .290 every season with power, and though he is not the best option in the OF, he can play out there if you need him. He also does not make a lot of money, and the injury history will keep both his annual dollars and years down. Same thing with Morales. The guy can hit and can probably be signed to a 3 year deal. They are not inconsistent. They are good hitters whenever they play. Playing has been the problem and Morales has shown he is over his ankle issue. Morse played a month with his injury this season because the M's couldn't put him on the DL because of all of the other injuries they had. That is a reason why it took so long for him to come back.

These type of players will help the Mets be better in the next few years as the team grows around them, without committing long term dollars.

Take a look at the 2014 free agents. There are not many good options and the best options will be over 30 years old. They have to spend wisely.

As for Ike Davis...he is a trade chip. He still has power and he did hit .250 after the All Star break last season. He also had good success in 2010/2011. Teams looking for a young player still under team control for 3 more seasons will definitely take a shot with him.

Signing two players is spending a lot of money? Choo and Ellsbury aren't going to be huge commodities. Choo is criminally underrated and will likely get below market value as a result. Conversely, Ellsbury is more flashy and will likely get overpaid. But they're still good pieces to start the process, and you're not going to have to break the bank on them. Neither is a $100M player. I think Ellsbury can be had for roughly what BJ Upton got, and Choo can be had for somewhere around what Swisher or Bourn got. Those are reasonable contracts that aren't going to kill them if they don't pan out.

You make a lot of good points otherwise.

 

[tygerphan4ever]

The Yankees and Tiger fans seem to concur in some circles that Detroit takes this series. The possibility always exists that the Tigers can beat you, yes.. but, they've played series in recent years where NY has gotten their punches in too.. so, hush guys, Detroit doesn win EVERY series between the 2.

 

[rokketmn]

Now...for my Sox:

Though they have prospects like Boagerts and Bradley that could be ready next season, they still need a 1B, and C. Their best options are re-signing the players they already have. Give Napoli the guaranteed $13mm next season, and a lesser amount for 2015. Re-sign Jarrod Salty for 3 years/$20mm.

They could give Middlebrooks one more shot at 3B next season.

Even with those figures the Sox drop $20mm from payroll next season, which leaves room to sign Ellsbury to a reasonable contract.

 

[Chef99]

The Mets have that young core, and have about $40mm coming off their payroll next season. That will drop them into the $40-50mm payroll range. There just isn't enough quality to spend on.

These are the best options out there with their current age:

Carcher: they don't need one with D'Arnaud

1st base: Corey hart-32; Mike Napoli-32; Paul Konerko-38; Adam Lind - 30; Kendry Morales- 30; Justin Morneau-33; Mike Morse-32; Mark Reynolds-30.

2nd base: Cano- 31; Zobrist has a $7mm club option which Tampa will definitely pick up

3rd base: they have Wright

shortstop: Yuniesky Betancourt- 32; Alexi Casilla-29; Yunel Escobar-31 - Rays have a $5mm option, but they probably let him walk; Derek Jeter- 40 - as if he's really leaving the Yankees; Jhonny Peralta- 32 -and PED's

Outfield:Jason Kubel- 32 - D-Bax hold $7.5mm option; Nate McLouth-32; Mike Morse; David Murphy-32; Delmon Young-28; Coco Crisp-34 -A's hold $7.5mm club option; Jacoby Ellsbury-30; Curtis Granderson-33; Franklin Gutierrez-31; Chris Young-30 - A's hold $11mm option which I doubt they exercise; Carlos Beltran-37; Shin-Soo Choo-31; Nelson Cruz-33 - and PED's; Jeff Francouer-30; Corey Hart; Hunter Pence-31;

Not exactly a glowing list to choose from. The 2015 list is not any better.

The Mets could even do well to sign McLouth to a 2 year deal and hope that Brandon Nimmo is ready by 2015 or 2016. Or other stop gaps like David Murphy, Chris Young, or Jason Kubel.

Given the list... aside from Ellsbury, I would go for Morse and/or Morales, but only on deals 3 years or less. Likely 2 for Morse.

If I were Alderson, I wouldn't go crazy. The Mets best options for adding a long term power bat is likely to be through a trade.

While i'm still holding out hope for a Stanton deal, Pence is an interesting notion; I kinda like that gangly bastard.

 

[nynasty]

The Yankees and Tiger fans seem to concur in some circles that Detroit takes this series. The possibility always exists that the Tigers can beat you, yes.. but, they've played series in recent years where NY has gotten their punches in too.. so, hush guys, Detroit doesn win EVERY series between the 2.

No, in fact, the Yankees often get the better of the season series, or at least tie.

It's the post-season where the Tigers have their number.

 

[StanMarsh51]

I didn't say the Yankees plucked every small market team back then. That is about the only period in their 40yr Steinbrenner history they didn't do that. There was also a reason for that. Steinbrenner was banned from baseball and Gene Michael was able to hold onto draft picks. In this last decade, the Yankees threw money at every big name there was.

The road was easier. While the Indians had a solid lineup with Manny, Belle, Baerga, Lofton, Thome. etc, Charles Nagy was their best pitcher. Yes, Charles Nagy going against the likes of Clemens, Key, Pettitte, El Duque, Cone, Wells, and Gooden.

The White Sox and Orioles? They weren't consistent winners.The White Sox were awful and the Orioles had one good season in 1997. Then Jeffrey Maier ruined it for them.
The Blue Jays were awful and the Sox had two good years in 1998 and 1999.

Seattle won 90 games once in the late '90's and that was exactly 90 wins in 1997.

Where was the competition? Oakland got good in the early '00's.

The truth is the A.L was weak aside from the Yankees. Even the N.L had just the Braves as consistent winners. The playing field in this last decade has certainly evened out, and when that happened, the Yankees spent $400mm on Sabathia, Teixeira, and Burnett in 2009. Nothing wrong with that. They won. It's worth it. But let's call a spade a spade here, please.

Some of these seem inaccurate....

First, I don't know why you'd mention guys like Key and Gooden as if they were some studs at that point in their careers...neither were any good with the Yankees during the championship years they were there.

I also don't know how you get the Blue Jays were 'awful,' when they finished over .500 in 1998, 1999, 2000. (if we're including 2000 here).

I also don't know how you're saying the Orioles had 1 good year...they made the ALCS in both 1997-1998 and averaged 93 wins those 2 years.

Also, saying the Indians lineup was "solid" is a severe understatement, don't you think?

And just because a team wasn't a "consistent" winner doesn't mean they didn't have good years nor provide to there being competition in X years.

 

[rokketmn]

Signing two players is spending a lot of money? Choo and Ellsbury aren't going to be huge commodities. Choo is criminally underrated and will likely get below market value as a result. Conversely, Ellsbury is more flashy and will likely get overpaid. But they're still good pieces to start the process, and you're not going to have to break the bank on them. Neither is a $100M player. I think Ellsbury can be had for roughly what BJ Upton got, and Choo can be had for somewhere around what Swisher or Bourn got. Those are reasonable contracts that aren't going to kill them if they don't pan out.

I could go along with that if they can get Choo at 4/$50mm. That is not crazy. I think Ellsbury SHOULD get around or a little more than BJ, but Boras is his agent. That is tough. If that were case, as I wrote on another thread here, I think the Sox should re-sign him.

That would bring the Met payroll to about $70mm, which is still under where they are this season.

 

[tygerphan4ever]

Have you seen Hughes and Pettitte?

I know they've not pitched well of late, but that the Tigers of whom they have no fear.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

I didn't say the Yankees plucked every small market team back then. That is about the only period in their 40yr Steinbrenner history they didn't do that. There was also a reason for that. Steinbrenner was banned from baseball and Gene Michael was able to hold onto draft picks. In this last decade, the Yankees threw money at every big name there was.

The road was easier. While the Indians had a solid lineup with Manny, Belle, Baerga, Lofton, Thome. etc, Charles Nagy was their best pitcher. Yes, Charles Nagy going against the likes of Clemens, Key, Pettitte, El Duque, Cone, Wells, and Gooden.

The White Sox and Orioles? They weren't consistent winners.The White Sox were awful and the Orioles had one good season in 1997. Then Jeffrey Maier ruined it for them.

The Blue Jays were awful and the Sox had two good years in 1998 and 1999.

Seattle won 90 games once in the late '90's and that was exactly 90 wins in 1997.

Where was the competition? Oakland got good in the early '00's.

The truth is the A.L was weak aside from the Yankees. Even the N.L had just the Braves as consistent winners. The playing field in this last decade has certainly evened out, and when that happened, the Yankees spent $400mm on Sabathia, Teixeira, and Burnett in 2009. Nothing wrong with that. They won. It's worth it. But let's call a spade a spade here, please.

No, they really didn't when you actually look at it. 2009 was the only time they really went out and threw their weight around, and even then, the contracts they gave out were market value with the exception of Burnett. It's not like they were blowing away the market and fucking up the entire free agent system like the Dodgers did with Kevin Brown, or the Blue Jays did with Vernon Wells, for example. There was the perception that they did of course, but they really gave out the mega contracts pretty selectively, they didn't often go far over market value, and they often gave them out to re-sign their own players, which isn't the same as doing it to a free agent from someone else's organization.

The Orioles had one good season? More revisionist history. They were a quality team from 1992-1997, with one blip in 1995 when things just didn't break their way. They were also one of the biggest spenders in the league, until Peter Angelos realized that he could pocket more money if he convinced enough people that Baltimore is a small market.

And just because those other teams didn't pile up 90-win seasons didn't mean they weren't quality teams. The Mariners' mid-90s teams underachieved, but they still had a great core. They should have won more. The Indians should have won more. Just because they didn't doesn't mean they weren't good teams.

 

[tygerphan4ever]

No, in fact, the Yankees often get the better of the season series, or at least tie.

It's the post-season where the Tigers have their number.

If you go there, I shall challenge you-- Detroit has the best record against the Yankees in the past century than anyone in major league history. The Tigers have ALWAYS given you all you can handle.. win, lose, draw, or indifferent.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

Let's get back to talking about a team with a future...The Mets!

OR... Red Sox, Orioles, Tigers, Rays, Jays, Royals, A's, Mariners, Rangers, Nats, Braves, Cards, Reds, D-Backs, Dodgers, Pirates, and even the Marlins!!

The Marlins have a better future than the Yankees!! Who wants to talk about that?

Until they decide to blow it up again, which could be any day.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

I could go along with that if they can get Choo at 4/$50mm. That is not crazy. I think Ellsbury SHOULD get around or a little more than BJ, but Boras is his agent. That is tough. If that were case, as I wrote on another thread here, I think the Sox should re-sign him.

That would bring the Met payroll to about $70mm, which is still under where they are this season.

Exactly. They're good pieces. They're not difference makers, but they're pieces. Then, you hope that you can pick up a difference maker either in the future of by different means (such as Stanton), and hope one of your prospects develops into an impact player.

 

[rokketmn]

You'd rather lose 90+ and finish in last place than lose in the ALCS. You either win the World Series or you don't. If you don't, it's better to have good draft position. Unless you're the Yankees!

Look at how you contradict yourself in this very thread.

Yankees .500 record = doom, extinction. Sox well below .500 record last year = great draft position, set up for the future! The most hysterical part is you're completely oblivious to how silly your arguments are.


You used to be a Met fan, now you're a Sox fan? What the hell is that?

Ahhh...Nasty! I see you found me. I guess BigD gave you a heads up I was looking for you.

Yes..If I think my team will not win, I would rather have the draft pick. The Sox had 93 losses last season and ended up with one of the better pitching prospects in the draft at #7 overall.

The records have nothing to do with my predictions and you know that from the board earlier this season. We debated the age of the teams. You said the Yankees aren't old as per "average" age of the whole roster, as opposed to ages of the "key" players on the team. Good argument.

We debated the prospects and their ETA to the big leagues. I gave you the benefit of the doubt that all of the Yankee prospects make it, as I did with Boston. Now, there seems to be greater separation there in the Sox favor in term of talent AND ETA.

If you think these arguments are silly, then you are the oblivious one.

Welcome back!

 

[rokketmn]

The Orioles had one good season? More revisionist history. They were a quality team from 1992-1997, with one blip in 1995 when things just didn't break their way. They were also one of the biggest spenders in the league, until Peter Angelos realized that he could pocket more money if he convinced enough people that Baltimore is a small market.

And just because those other teams didn't pile up 90-win seasons didn't mean they weren't quality teams. The Mariners' mid-90s teams underachieved, but they still had a great core. They should have won more. The Indians should have won more. Just because they didn't doesn't mean they weren't good teams.

Have you looked at the rosters of those teams? Aside form Mussina, it was a journeyman or has-been staff. Ripken was starting the downside of his career, and Eddie Murray was long gone. The win totals of some of these teams are not a testament to the talent, but rather the lack there-of of the league in general.

In any event, I am not talking about the early 90's. I am talking the late '90's when the Yankees made their run.

I forget who the poster was who commented on my comment about the Indians lineup. Yeah, it was good. But what history has told us,and Yankee fans know this (as well as Giants fans), it is the pitching that wins it all in the playoffs. When Charles Nagy is your best starter and you are going against a team as experienced and with as good a pitching as the Yankees had, you are fighting a losing battle.

Even in 2009, it was Pettitte who was the main reason the Yankees were able to beat the Phillies. Howard was useless against Yankee lefties. Even Burnett had a great game in there.

The Mariners did under-achieve, but Randy Johnson was gone after '97, and he missed most of the '96 season. They never really had many chances with him on the roster. The rest of the staff was not great either. It featured Jamie Moyer in a supporting role, and he was pretty good.

 

[rokketmn]

As good as Stanton is, it would cost the Mets too much to get him. You are looking at Zack Wheeler for sure and then hitting prospects like Flores and Nimmo. Maybe even Cecchini too.

Stanton is a good get for teams like the Sox, Rangers, or Cardinals that are close enough to winning and have the minor league talent they can afford to give up. They all could also afford to sign him long term.

 

[StanMarsh51]

Have you looked at the rosters of those teams? Aside form Mussina, it was a journeyman or has-been staff. Ripken was starting the downside of his career, and Eddie Murray was long gone. The win totals of some of these teams are not a testament to the talent, but rather the lack there-of of the league in general.

In any event, I am not talking about the early 90's. I am talking the late '90's when the Yankees made their run.

I forget who the poster was who commented on my comment about the Indians lineup. Yeah, it was good. But what history has told us,and Yankee fans know this (as well as Giants fans), it is the pitching that wins it all in the playoffs. When Charles Nagy is your best starter and you are going against a team as experienced and with as good a pitching as the Yankees had, you are fighting a losing battle.

Even in 2009, it was Pettitte who was the main reason the Yankees were able to beat the Phillies. Howard was useless against Yankee lefties. Even Burnett had a great game in there.

The Mariners did under-achieve, but Randy Johnson was gone after '97, and he missed most of the '96 season. They never really had many chances with him on the roster. The rest of the staff was not great either. It featured Jamie Moyer in a supporting role, and he was pretty good.

Nagy's last year as Cleveland's best pitcher was 1997...from 1998 on it was Colon

And what is this nonsense that Pettitte was the "main reason" the Yankees beat the Phillies in 2009....that's a slap in the face to the rest of the team, given Pettitte's performance in those 2 starts:

6 innings, 5 hits, 3 BB, 4 ER, 7 K
5.2 innings, 4 hits, 5 BB, 3 ER, 3 K

So his ERA was 5.40 and WHIP of 1.46 during the WS...Yankees scored 8 and 7 runs for him the 2 games...it's not as if he pitched shutouts or anything close to it.